[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAB_54W4jAZqSJ-7VuT0uOukHEnxAYpaGqZ6S6n9tYst26F+VWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2022 18:12:49 -0500
From: Alexander Aring <alex.aring@...il.com>
To: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
Cc: Stefan Schmidt <stefan@...enfreihafen.org>,
linux-wpan - ML <linux-wpan@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org Wireless"
<linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
David Girault <david.girault@...vo.com>,
Romuald Despres <romuald.despres@...vo.com>,
Frederic Blain <frederic.blain@...vo.com>,
Nicolas Schodet <nico@...fr.eu.org>,
Michael Hennerich <michael.hennerich@...log.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Varka Bhadram <varkabhadram@...il.com>,
Xue Liu <liuxuenetmail@...il.com>, Alan Ott <alan@...nal11.us>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/41] IEEE 802.15.4 scan support
Hi,
On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 at 05:40, Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Alexander,
>
> > > So far the only technical point that is missing in this series is the
> > > possibility to grab a reference over the module driving the net device
> > > in order to prevent module unloading during a scan or when the beacons
> > > work is ongoing.
>
> Do you have any advises regarding this issue? That is the only
> technical point that is left unaddressed IMHO.
>
module_get()/module_put() or I don't see where the problem here is.
You can avoid module unloading with it. Which module is the problem
here?
> > > Finally, this series is a deep reshuffle of David Girault's original
> > > work, hence the fact that he is almost systematically credited, either
> > > by being the only author when I created the patches based on his changes
> > > with almost no modification, or with a Co-developped-by tag whenever the
> > > final code base is significantly different than his first proposal while
> > > still being greatly inspired from it.
> > >
> >
> > can you please split this patch series, what I see is now:
> >
> > 1. cleanup patches
> > 2. sync tx handling for mlme commands
> > 3. scan support
>
> Works for me. I just wanted to give the big picture but I'll split the
> series.
>
maybe also put some "symbol duration" series into it if it's getting
too large? It is difficult to review 40 patches... in one step.
> Also sorry for forgetting the 'wpan-next' subject prefix.
>
no problem.
I really appreciate your work and your willingness to work on all
outstanding issues. I am really happy to see something that we can use
for mlme-commands and to separate it from the hotpath transmission...
It is good to see architecture for that which I think goes in the
right direction.
- Alex
Powered by blists - more mailing lists